4K vs 5K

I work in academics and am looking for a desktop as I need a bigger screen for writing. I currently have a mid-2009 MBP which I've upgraded to 8GB of RAM and installed an SSD drive, but still have problems with speed. I'd like my new iMAC to last for a while and was wondering if I should go with the 4K vs 5K. I was thinking 4K since the 5K initially seemed too big, but I've read that the 4K is lackluster for the price. My main wish is that this computer will last me a while with minimal upgrades. So my question, which computer should I get for mainly word processing with bibliographic software and multiple windows, and intermittent movie watching and photo editing. Do you think the 4K + fusion drive is sufficient or should I get the 5K with fusion drive since the 5K gives me the option to increase memory on my own at a later date.

I recently went through the same thought process over several months. I started off looking at the mid-range 21.5", but by the time I considered the screen quality, I decided the top 21.5" would be better.

Then I realised that I would have to upgrade the RAM, just in case 8GB wasn't enough so I eventually settled on the mid-range 27" on the basis that it was better and I could see if 8GB was enough and then upgrade the RAM myself at a later date.

I am.very happy with my choice, with 2TB fusion drive.

I have no real comparison to give you but hopefully my thought process will help your decision.

The usage that you mention plus the fact your goal is more screen real estate I'd look into the 27" models. If you're working out of multiple windows it's just so much more pleasant to have that space available.

Nothing you describe sounds taxing enough to warrant the performance bump but the RAM upgradability, dedicated GPU and the generational processor bump will give you slightly more future proofing with the 27" models.

If you go with the fusion drive I suggest 2 or 3 tb versions like you initially were looking at. They have a significantly larger SSD portion than the 1 tb version. Or go with all SSD if you budget permits.

Do you think the 4K + fusion drive is sufficient or should I get the 5K

Click to expand...

Both are fine machines, but for your money, I think you get more computer with regards to the 5k model. You get a newer processor (skylake), you get a dGPU which will handle anything you throw at it, and most of all you get a gorgeous 27" display. That's hard to pass up imo.

I work in academics and am looking for a desktop as I need a bigger screen for writing. I currently have a mid-2009 MBP which I've upgraded to 8GB of RAM and installed an SSD drive, but still have problems with speed. I'd like my new iMAC to last for a while and was wondering if I should go with the 4K vs 5K. I was thinking 4K since the 5K initially seemed too big, but I've read that the 4K is lackluster for the price. My main wish is that this computer will last me a while with minimal upgrades. So my question, which computer should I get for mainly word processing with bibliographic software and multiple windows, and intermittent movie watching and photo editing. Do you think the 4K + fusion drive is sufficient or should I get the 5K with fusion drive since the 5K gives me the option to increase memory on my own at a later date.

I am flexible with price. I appreciate your thoughts.

Click to expand...

Just pick on which screen size you prefer.
The problem with 5K is no one is broadcasting in it, so your unlikely to get any internet movies in 5K to watch.
TBH your lucky to find much 4K content!
So just decide if 21" or 27" is better for your needs. Both will last you a good number of years based on your usage.
I use my late 2012 iMac (hooked up to another screen) for photo editing, and general internet, word processing stuff, and I'd imagine this should be good for another 2-3 years.

Staff Member

For me it is, in the sense that I tried the 21" and felt it a bit confining. I have a 24" Apple Cinema Display and after spending almost 2k (on a 4k iMac), I'd be left with a machine that seemed smaller then what I already was using (MBP + ACD). I wanted the increased screen real estate and I have no regrets. To each his own, as one size does not fit all.

For me it is, in the sense that I tried the 21" and felt it a bit confining. I have a 24" Apple Cinema Display and after spending almost 2k (on a 4k iMac), I'd be left with a machine that seemed smaller then what I already was using (MBP + ACD). I wanted the increased screen real estate and I have no regrets. To each his own, as one size does not fit all.

Click to expand...

People never go down with screen size. They always go bigger for desktops anyhow.
27" is the most common size on desktops these days.

Staff Member

People never go down with screen size. They always go bigger for desktops anyhow.
27" is the most common size on desktops these days.

Click to expand...

No, as it seems to impact their work and expectations. Though I know a few people at work who had a 15" laptop and went down to a 11 (or 12") and love it. Personally that's just to small for me, but I think they're the exception to the rule

I just came from a 2007 20" iMac, Going to the 27" was a great thing for me. I have an elliptical machine in my office and watch TV while I workout through my cable provider via the internet. I also love splitting the screen and viewing and working in full mode 2 different applications.

Just pick on which screen size you prefer.
The problem with 5K is no one is broadcasting in it, so your unlikely to get any internet movies in 5K to watch.
TBH your lucky to find much 4K content!
So just decide if 21" or 27" is better for your needs. Both will last you a good number of years based on your usage.
I use my late 2012 iMac (hooked up to another screen) for photo editing, and general internet, word processing stuff, and I'd imagine this should be good for another 2-3 years.

Click to expand...

Well to be fair 5k monitors weren't designed for consuming 5k content, although they could. Their primary purpose its for 4k video editing since you can have the entire 4k video in native resolution on the screen still leaving room for your tools.

I think we are misrepresenting the use of 4k vs 5k here. It should be 21" vs 27".

Well to be fair 5k monitors weren't designed for consuming 5k content, although they could. Their primary purpose its for 4k video editing since you can have the entire 4k video in native resolution on the screen still leaving room for your tools.

I think we are misrepresenting the use of 4k vs 5k here. It should be 21" vs 27".

Click to expand...

Agree. I doubt most people would see the difference between 4K and 5k. However you'd be hard pressed to find someone who couldn't tell the difference between 21 and 27".

Staff Member

Agree. I doubt most people would see the difference between 4K and 5k. However you'd be hard pressed to find someone who couldn't tell the difference between 21 and 27".

Click to expand...

I didn't buy my iMac because it had a 5k display, I bought it because it was 27" I don't do anything that really requires 5k, and given my old eyes, I don't even run the resolution at the default setting but scaled to make the text bigger

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.